Sunday, February 12, 2017

Joy Beth Smith joined Focus on the Family in May 2016 as the editor of Boundless.org, a website for single people in the church. The 28-year-old is fairly media savvy: By the time she started at Focus, she was shopping a book proposal and had bylines at magazines like Christianity Today. When her blog posts for Boundless started getting picked up—including a piece republished by The Washington Post in June—her bosses were thrilled, she told me recently.

But Smith was also pushing the Boundless audience. She commissioned a post about race that she described as “mild”—“it basically addressed that there are still racial divides,” she said. When Omar Mateen murdered dozens of people at Pulse, the gay nightclub in Orlando, she wrote a tribute post, which caused a “bit of a stir” among readers, she said: “I don’t know how you can get stirred up over lives that were lost, but people were. That’s kind of the conservative space we existed in and were working against at times.”

In October, Smith wrote a piece for The Washington Post about her experience with sexual assault, criticizing Trump for his derogatory comments toward women and Christian leaders for not speaking out. And that’s when she started getting serious internal pushback.

Almost as soon as the article went up, Paul Batura, Focus’s vice president of communications, pulled Smith into a meeting with her supervisor, Lisa Anderson, Smith alleges. Batura asked Smith if she could have the piece removed from the Post’s website. That would be impossible, Smith explained; and besides, she had written the piece under her own byline, not as a representative of Focus. Batura told her to remove her affiliation with Boundless from her personal social-media accounts, and at the end of the day, she was given notice of an official conduct warning.

The next day, Focus leadership sent out an email to the staff clarifying the organization’s policy on political speech, according to documents shared by Smith. “The most prudent path for all of us—and the most protective approach for Focus—is to leave the policy statements up to Jim Daly, Paul Batura, the quarterbacks, or others authorized to speak on Focus’ behalf,” wrote Joel Vaughan, the chief of staff and human-resources officer at Focus. He added that “it is permissible of course—and often helpful—to agree publicly with positions Focus has taken, such as linking personal pages to Focus posts … or to Jim Daly’s blog.” A few days later, they asked Smith to take down several social-media posts about Evan McMullin, who she was supporting for president. The message was that “‘sometimes the wisest course of action is not to engage,’” Smith told me. “Of course, that’s what Christianity has been doing for years, and it hasn’t worked so well for us.”

At the beginning of November, Focus circulated a “spokesperson” policy, according to Smith. It stated that public-facing representatives of the organization were not allowed to comment on candidates for political office, and could only speak on political issues with Focus’s authorization. Smith was asked to take down more posts: Right after the election, she wrote a Facebook status lamenting transgender suicide. “It comes across as smug, disrespectful, and distinctly partisan,” a staffer told her, according to a text exchange Smith shared. “I think there’s a lack of wisdom in going at this on social. Please pull.”

On November 18, Smith’s bosses told her they didn’t think she could be a good spokesperson for Focus on the Family, according to Smith. She was given two options: She could resign, get a severance, promise not to take legal action, and sign a non-disparagement agreement. Or, she could choose to be fired. She chose firing.

That's exactly what an organization should do once it discovers an SJW has infiltrated. However, there is no point in issuing warnings; SJWs are always going to double-down, so at best they're going to bide their time and continue to undermine the organization in every way they can.

Any organization that does not wish to be converged needs to establish proactive anti-SJW measures, including formal policy statements banning the advocacy of social justice and warnings that any public support for social justice will be grounds for instant termination. The inevitable SJW rules-lawyering needs to be anticipated, and stamped out the moment it appears.

Remember that they always start with mild and gentle prods at the boundaries. Focus should have known - and probably did know - that she was trouble at that point. And anytime you hear phrases like "contrary to conservative Christian opinion", "staying silent isn't an option" and references to "fighting", you know you've got an SJW entryist on your hands. Deal with them accordingly.

Yes, people who suffer from mental disorder have high suicide rates, and gender dysphoria is a mental illness.Personally I don't care about men putting on dresses, but I will not tolerate having to pretend their delusions are real, no matter if doing so does indeed cause more of them to an hero.

Problem is that is infinitely harder for conservative organizations to do so, as that article demonstrates. They will be publicly shamed and their calls for freedom of speech in case of Trumps supporters or conservatives in general being censored or terrorized will be used against them. We are still nowhere close to state where this can be afforded. So it is brave to out and reject these people, but it is also dumb and inconsiderate as far as big picture goes.

They will be publicly shamed and their calls for freedom of speech in case of Trumps supporters or conservatives in general being censored or terrorized will be used against them. We are still nowhere close to state where this can be afforded. So it is brave to out and reject these people, but it is also dumb and inconsiderate as far as big picture goes.

What world are you living in? "We're not going to expel parasites within our organization for fear that an increasingly inconsequential, despised leftist rag will write mean words about this!" is exactly the weak cuckservative attitude that led to this present mess.

If anything, it's good that leftists have now publicly been warned their antics might get them fired from within the Christian Church.

"Dingle, 34, writes and speaks about welcoming disabled people into the church. She has a background in special education, and several of her six young kids have special needs: One is in a wheelchair, another is autistic, and another is HIV-positive."

Why don't these people write and work for organizations that reflect their views, instead of attempting amateur cultural genocide?

It's not what they believe on these issues that makes them repulsive and frightening, but that they are determined to erase from public life, and preferably from history, all other beliefs. ALL other beliefs, of which the "conservative Christian" perspective is only one.

Such a remarkable family photo in the original article. The kids look like normal kids, other than the black boy hamming-it-up for the camera, and that's still a fairly normal pose at least for Haitian male orphans, based on my personal experiences interacting with them. But the sneering, aggressive, crazy-eyed look on the woman's face is definitely unique, as is the look on her husband's face. Guy looks like he just sat on a tack but doesn't dare move for risk of ruining the photo and incurring wifey's wrath. Also looks as if he's hoping for some Facebook likes and comments telling him what a good boy he is. Pathetic.

A big problem for any organization is how to rid itself of bad actors, and to be able to do so before they have a chance to do big damage. It looks like focus on the family has had some pretty good legal advice and has set up policy criteria by which discipline can be enforced with little risk of successful reprisal. This probably comes from experience. Sometimes it is impossible to tell who an infiltrator is before they have achieved their purpose, if they choose to remain underground long enough and don't leave any fingerprints giving them away. Thinking of Damon Linker at Richard John Neuhaus' organization. Much easier to deal with someone who gets into activist mode early on. I have experienced both infiltration resulting in the destruction of organizations I have had a hand in forming and I have successfully infiltrated and broken up organizations myself. You can even do it if you are constantly under suspicion if you know just where to pick your fights. Therefore, while structure is important, even more important is who is running things and their degree of vigilance. Having trusted advisers is not enough, either, as more often than not it is a trusted individual who is the pathway in for the infiltrator. It is important to have advisers who are in competition with each other and are not on the same page in order to have a natural vetting process. Having everyone on the same page at all times is not healthy. Being able to get them on the same page at will under leadership is more important.

“Getting to uproot everything I know and love and move 1,000 miles away to take my dream job here at Boundless. That sounds silly because being a single girl in your late twenties can feel pretty dreadful some days, but on days like today, where I realize everything I get to do because I don’t have to prioritize a husband or children, I’m incredibly thankful.”

"When Omar Mateen murdered dozens of people at Pulse, the gay nightclub in Orlando, she wrote a tribute post [....] she wrote a Facebook status lamenting transgender suicide. “It comes across as smug, disrespectful, and distinctly partisan,” a staffer told her [....] Evan McMullin, who she was supporting for president

Focus on the Family has for several years had difficulty honing its message. Christians should be reminded that that FOTF grew out of the Holiness Movement, a branch of Christianity that believes that real believers never sin after conversion, a serious heresy. About 5 years ago they decided that their main pastor Bill Dobson was too extreme and moderated their message and decided to be more culturally hip. A couple of years ago FOTF said that men are more sinful then women, another heretical belief that essentially denies the doctrine of original sin. I am glad FOTF fired this SJW, but Christians ought to give Focus a wide berth anyway.

It feels like things should be different in the church. Markers of spiritual maturity, like depth of character or a willingness to serve, should trump my above average BMI, but very rarely is that the case. I see it in the faces of guys I’m meeting for the first time after being matched on eHarmony, even though we’ve exchanged weeks of witty banter and embarrassing confessions. I hear it in the concerned tones of mentors and parents and friends who repeat phrases like “You’ve got such a pretty face,” and “I know you want to be married someday. Do you think losing weight would help?”

Every ounce of my being cringes, because they’re probably right. And I hate that. I am talented and opinionated and passionate and valuable. I am good at writing and making jokes and cleaning. I would make a wonderful wife, and I would spend the rest of my life trying to selflessly love and serve my husband. I would love to whittle away the days manning a minivan full of foster kids and friends to soccer games and recitals and tutoring. None of these things would be diminished because of my size, and yet none of them seem to matter because of my size.

So she can't find church guy who's willing to overlook that she's fat and won't give him any children of his own? It's a crying shame I tells ya.

Awwww. Fired before she even had the time to write up and submit a Code of Conduct.

I bet she also thought Jesus was her pimp, setting her up with one night stands so that she would one day be sexually experienced enough to please her future husband (whom Jesus would deliver to her sometime in her mid-thirties.)

4. Drop the REAL bomb(s) they had always intended; wait for the reaction; these bombs are almost ALWAYS full of projections onto their "own people" (women excel at this whole "I just wish people in my own office could accept [gays, blacks, immigrants, muslims..."women"].."

5. Either change the org, or get removed (See Rob Bell), and ensure it's public and possibly nasty;

6. Talk/write publicly about their "experience" to their own Bill Mayer/SNL crowd..you know, the ones that like to throw a comment (project), then laugh derisively with the shaking of the head "those knuckle dragging cave dwellers...sheesh"

All of those actions fall within Vox's 3-stage pattern. I would not be surprised if this gal starts accusing her former employee and/or people of something insidious within a few weeks. That fits the SJW pattern of one-upping even THEMSELVES..."if you actually knew the REAL TRUTH Katie [Couric] !!!"

I grew up with it with my sister, 40 years ago...all of SJW tactics and the Left in general, are feminine in how they attack (that's why crybully is the perfect portmanteau).

Oh. My mistake. She's a sad sack fatty whose dates run out on her the moment they see her in real life and realize that her "facebook angle" photo was taken at ceiling level through an inch of lens Vaseline.

@8 - Sure, pushing back against SJW stunts will get negative publicity. A smart conservative already knows that, so the trick is to flip it to his advantage. Trump is a master at this sort of thing.

If a conservative news site fires a lefty mole, they should meet the outraged publicity from the left with a stronger message. Announce the hiring of a strong conservative writer to replace the commie. Remember, it's not only the left that hears the media propaganda: people on the right can't escape it, so it will act as unpaid advertising. And right-wingers and traditionalists are starved for healthy news sources - many of them will come to check out a pugnacious group that promises to deliver more of the same. They'll just shrug wearily and turn away if they hear the same old cautious placating they've heard from NRO for years.

17. DissidentRight: The first comment to her on Q&A on Boundless is priceless! Cucking/white knighting, with completely confusion about what the Orthodox Church is and would be to this woman. She would have ZERO chance at being this "outlaw" in the Orthodox Church, and not a man would touch her (there, either).

If I didn't know better I would have thought Roosh or TheRationalMale wrote that comment:

"I am in the middle of reading your article "Fat. Single. Christian. ... " There was no picture attached, so while reading it, I imagined you as some sort of pig. I googled you hoping to find a picture. I was surprised by how attractive you are. The people in your church that refuse to date you are retarded."

She cites Lindy West in that article; that's pretty much all you need to know.

Ccan you imagine a man writing an article like that, only about how it was unfair that women didn't want to date him because he didn't have a job? Even in Christian circles he'd be laughed out of the room.

Actually, Orthodox Church seems to be cucked too. I listen to the Orthodox Nationalist podcast (great stuff, heavy on high brow philosophy) nationalist podcast, and host often talks about of the extent to which Orthodoxy has been openly infiltrated by progressives and heretics. He was actually defrocked for his openly right wing stances.

@18 - "And what's with young progressive XTIANS almost always loudly expressing their love for C. S. Lewis? Man's rolling in his grave, he is."

Among Catholics, it's G.K. Chesterton they claim to adore, and even want him made a saint. The filthy Mark Shea is typical of this kind. I think they fancy Chesterton as the patron saint of rollicking self-indulgence.

But that's the problem. She's "cute" now, but give her 5-10 years, and she will hit the proverbial wall, and hit it HARD. Because that's the price you pay for being a SJW. The ugliness has to manifest somewhere, and for most SJWs, it just happens to be their face.

"I am talented and opinionated and passionate and valuable. I am good at writing and making jokes and cleaning. I would make a wonderful wife,"

You don't get to define "wonderful wife"; the men you're trying to attract do. And to men, sexual attraction is part of the definition, and so few men are attracted to fat that it's considered a fetish.

It's like she's trying to sell a car and she's describing the comfortable interior, first-rate suspension, all the latest gadgets...

Customer: How's the engine?Joy Beth: Well, the engine is a chainsaw engine that we rigged to the transmission, so you have to pull a cord to start it and it has a top speed of 5mph. But look at that stereo!

So she can't find church guy who's willing to overlook that she's fat and won't give him any children of his own?

When you read between the lines of "embarrassing confessions" and "foster kids," I'd guess there's a past there that'll stand your hair on end, even by today's standards. Not uncommon among Churchian girls who are "talented and opinionated and passionate," unfortunately.

Should a conservative, religious, pro life woman who nevertheless speaks positively of Feminism be regarded as an SJW infiltrator?

And yes, they do exists. I've never met any personally but I have read their writings. Feminism is attractive to more than just liberal women.

I hate Feminism, but don't regard it as necessarily part and parcel of SJWism. There are even Feminists who oppose the tranny rights movement and Islamic immigration for Feminist reasons. Are they our allies? The one thing I like about Islam is it's anti Feminism so I feel conflicted.

I don't care about her picture. I've met women for dates after meeting them online who somehow managed to hide 50+ pounds from the camera (witchcraft, I think).

Her own friends tell her she needs to lose weight. That's brutal, and not something you do to a girl unless you're convinced there's no other choice. She's fat -- and that's before the pounds she'll put on when she relaxes after finding a beta provider to drive her foster kids around.

I'm fat too. Fortunately, that's not as much of a handicap for a man, but I don't lie to myself that it's not hurting my attractiveness. It's on me to lose weight if I want to change that. It wouldn't do me any good to have people saying, "Nah, you're not fat in this picture," and trying to protect me from criticism.

@43 "She's obviously intelligent and well read young woman. I would prefer it if we actually tried to fix and integrate people like her, instead of following the same route that SJWs do..."

Casting these rebellious people out of the church is the proper Biblical discipline for these people. You can't fix people who don't even think they are broken, however, ostracizing them (especially for women) can bring them back to the church if their is still any yearning for truth left in their hearts.

Surprised to see FoF react to this SJW. They're already thoroughly cucked (or at least were not long ago) when it comes to third-world colonization (all the invading Aztecs are "Christians") and Golden Dindu (whose Churchianity is more real than YTs - because preachers who prance and shout in thousand-dollar suits while they keep a harem on the side). As I recall, the head of the organization in 2009 stated that 'America needs more families like Obama's' when Housenigga Hussein assumed the position of teleprompter-reader for (((Soros))). Yes indeed, we really need more families of communists and black-supremacists who lie about everything 24 x 7 x 365. The Judeo-Christ would no doubt approve. Perhaps old Dobson kind of cleaned house from his retirement? Or, was this just an exception to the overall rule of Churchianity?

One more thing, she isn't grotesquely fat. Nothing unusual about a woman in her 20's being 70lbs overweight in this day. Unfortunate but true. Lots of fat people get married. That in mind, she isn't single because men reject her. She's single because men she's attracted to reject her. She would like them to drop their standards while she keeps her standards set at what she feels she deserves. Given that she describes herself as an opinionated extrovert feminist on top of being obese, I imagine she has rejected a long list of decent but not so handsome or charismatic men.

@62 haus frau: "She would like them to drop their standards while she keeps her standards set at what she feels she deserves. Given that she describes herself as an opinionated extrovert feminist on top of being obese, I imagine she has rejected a long list of decent but not so handsome or charismatic men."

It's the boundless solipsism that I just cannot comprehend. I am extremely self-critical, and well aware of all my failings - and I merely remind myself of them every time I'm irritated at my husband for some reason (major or minor). As others noted, you don't get to define what makes you a potential wonderful spouse. There's an assistant/aesthetician where my close (married Christian) friend works who's like this. In many ways she's quite traditional, from the South, and has a pretty face. She's also 45, single, overweight, and looks like the epitome of the SJW cat lady (and she has 2 cats). She says she's only interested in men between certain ages and at least 6 feet tall (she's shorter than me and I'm 5'2"). She's currently in some sort of purely on-line "relationship" and she goes so far as to talk about where she and this guy she's never met (it's been 9 months and he keeps coming up with reasons) will retire to! You just can't fix this.

If her gift from God is an insatiable appetite for Twinkies and 230 pounds of pure love for Judeo-Christ's views on culture, gender, and sexuality who are we to complain that she's not another third of herself under her true twinkyself weight?

Focus on the Family has been the focus of lefty attacks for 40 years. They are well aware of it and actively fight back.

Most other US organizations have also been the focus of lefty attacks for the last 40 years. Unfortunately, those organizations have no clue that they have been under attack. They still think if they play nice with the left they can all get along and sing Kumbaya.

Were they always unorthodox with their female worship, or was that the result of the left's attacks? It's been stated earlier that they subscribe to the idea that women aren't as sinful, so don't really need Jesus Christ. Glenn Stanton, their current keeper of orthodoxy, has a video series where he talks about how his wife has a magic channel to God, and her material greed and demands of him - and the using of sex as a weapon to curb his behavior and bring him to heel - was her using her God parts that men just don't have to train him. They are famous for their statement that boys turn into sinners automatically, but girls only turn into sinners if there's a man involved.

I don't know if they were ever orthodox. I know I don't trust any of their writings. Perhaps they were better before the 40 years of assaults, but I suspect they're like the CBMW - a crypto feminist organization that worships their own Judeo-Christ, since they hired this stupid girl in the beginning when she claimed to be a conservative feminist.

Family Life Today and Focus on the Family, over the years, have peddled the whole "Step it up Guys/Man up" routine...if you listen to their shows, you pick up the coding/signals...you know, the Father's day speech that always includes the line "Yet, far too often we see fathers...[fill in the failures])". Men's groups are "Man up" while across the hall when are getting "You just need to relax and exhale..."

Nothing unusual about a woman in her 20's being 70lbs overweight in this day.

It used to be said that every pound you lost was one point off your systolic blood pressure, there are not many surviving chairs or exam tables left from when people believed that. If she is admitting to 70 lbs its likely far more. I feel sorry for the little white boy in the picture.

From her picture, she's neither fat nor unattractive. Het of your high horse

Were-Puppy wrote:A lot of these don't want kids. I've never understood that. Especially when it says be fruitful and mulitply.Having children means giving of yourself, and self-denial. She clearly is incapable of that.

They're crazy, literally. Years of being without the guidance of a father or husband, and riding the carousel and telling themselves they're being independent and empowered, scrambles their brains. By the time the baby rabies kick in, which they usually do sooner or later, they've been suppressing their feminine instincts for so long that they sabotage that out of habit too.

I think we need a new Constitutional Amendment, stating that once a President leaves office, he's not allowed anywhere in or around D.C unless his presence is specifically requested by the current President.

It's even worse than that.She says she's on track to lose 70 pounds. Most obese women's "target weight" is to merely be at the low end of the obese range. IF you look at the picture linked in my post above, you'll see that her thighs are literally more appropriate on dairy cows than on a human female in her 20's whose looking for a husband.

The fact of the matter is... she HATES men. IF she wanted to please a man, she would learn how to eat for one, rather than 3, every day. She won't admit it, but she despises men. She doesn't want a to give ANY form of sexual pleasure to a husband... NOT EVEN CHILDREN. It doesn't get any worse than that.

"One more thing, she isn't grotesquely fat. Nothing unusual about a woman in her 20's being 70lbs overweight in this day. Unfortunate but true."

Uh... whether it's currently common or not, 70 lbs overweight IS grotesquely fat to any normal man. Why?

Because EVERY SINGLE MAN ALIVE TODAY is descended from hunter-gatherers, for whom food was obtained only through effort, and the only fat women were the daughters of the leader of the more successful tribes.... and pregnant women.

All OTHER women would *not* be fat... in fact, they would be downright slender. Now... in this environment... a woman who is a few pounds overweight.... is probably pregnant. If you're a guy, and you're pursuing a woman, and she's ALREADY pregnant with some other guy's kid... it's to your advantage to recognize this as quickly as possible (so that you're not wasting time and resources pursuing a woman carring some other man's baby).

YOU, as a female, might not notice a woman putting on 30 pounds. But I, as a male, can tell when a woman who I'm familiar with has put on even 5 pounds.

As a woman, you have no need to be revolted by fat (in fact, since historically, fat implied wealth, women are somewhat attracted to it, as women seem to be genetically attracted to wealth), but as as a man, very few things are more revolting to European and Asian men than a woman with too much fat on her body. I'll put it this way... a woman with a 22" - 24" waist is generally attractive. 26" sometimes. 27"-28"... that's the wrong side of the fence.

It doesn't matter how nice her face is, and especially not how nice her clothes and makeup are. Being overweight is sexually revolting to most men because the male mind is tuned to interpret that as "already pregnant."

Good. Now make it federal law, so we can get rid of the convergence of our (US and probably other Western) bureaucracy. It's, in part, coming through the union reps. Will have to put an end to public unions, among other things it provides.

Government bureaucracy and the crazy powers it has grabbed seem to be leading private and semi-private employment issues, leading down the wrong path. Yeah... it's a lot of work. But if it doesn't get done we are all toast, sooner or later.

We were all born into a psychological warfare machine through the global elite owned media/govt that purposely engineered the polarization between not only Gay vs. Straight, but, legal immigrants and US Citizens, Rich and Poor, Black vs. White, Gay vs. Straight, Christians vs. Muslims, Jews vs. Christians, etc.,etc.. All of that insanity is simply planned wars of distraction created to ultimately have one group fight with another for order out of chaos clearly provoking the people into gladly giving away more freedoms/wealth to their puppet government, all in the world government plan.

From the global elitist perspective: NONE of what has or is discovered from further understanding biology, health and ALL human behavior through academia/govt will be allowed to generate an actual diffusion of whats most wrong/unfair.Humanity is currently being further disabled both biologically and mentally in preparation to implement the conditions necessary for unprecedented global totalitarian control for the planned coming age of human deconstruction (transhumanism) for the people of the world out to 2045 and beyond.

Whatever age you are for your lifetime rapidly advancing technology has been speeding up a plan to establish a technological New World Order. Pedophilia and homosexuality are politicized while so many political puppets are forced into that honsexual behavior simply to gain control over them. That method has been established over generations to control key people in the politically favored class necessary for population control. Since way before America's founding this has been going on.

We are born into war because of chaos and order. That those take on personal, social, economic, national, international, and other forms is just a means of ordering the disordered. God isn't playing, we chose he let us. And Satan is an idiot. But men are weak. It's... just that simple.

Kill off one prince, another will simply take their place. If their are better, more humble, more fearful/feared princes... true. If it's a conspiracy, it's been going on since pre-history. All I'm saying.